CLICK FLAG!

ANOTHER GUNNY G BLOG!

Sunday, December 16, 2007

Home No one else was saying it !!!No one else is saying it !!!No one else will say it !!!

Home » Articles/Blog

Estulin: Elitists Consider Assassinating Ron Paul

Submitted by h.hoffman on Sun, 12/16/2007 - 00:59.

Estulin: Elitists Consider Assassinating Ron PaulClick here to listen to the MP3 interview with Daniel Estulin.Best-selling author and Bilderberg sleuth says intelligencesources told him highest levels of U.S. government discussingwhat result would be if Congressman was killedPaul Joseph Watson Prison PlanetFriday, December 14, 2007Best-selling author and Bilderberg sleuth Daniel Estulin says he has received information from sources inside the U.S. intelligence community which suggests that people from the highest levels of the U.S. government are considering an assassination attempt against Congressman Ron Paul because they are threatened by his burgeoning popularity.

Estulin, whose information has unfortunately proven very accurate in the past, went public with the bombshell news during an appearance on The Alex Jones Show today.

"I am getting information from my sources that there are people involved from a higher level of the American establishment who are seriously considering - this has not been confirmed - but assassination is definitely on the agenda and I pray to God that this is not the case," said Estulin.

(Article continues below)

Estulin, an award winning investigative journalist, said that he was given the information from a source that has been reliable for over a decade in providing accurate projections of future events based on what the elite were discussing in their own circles and that assassination was a serious option should the Ron Paul Revolution continue to pick up steam.Estulin, author of the global bestseller The True Story of the Bilderberg Group described the concept as a "trial balloon from the inner core within the inner core - it hasn't gone beyond that but it is obviously on the table because I think needless to say they are very much concerned," he added.

Ron Paul himself has stated on a previous occasion that he is aware of the dangers of being such a bold icon for freedom and understands that political assassinations have occured in the past.

In a June appearance on The Alex Jones Show, Congressman Paul acknowledged that such a threat is "real," agreeing with a number of historical examples where leaders were killed or attacked for successfully standing up to the system. "That's right. They'll do it," Paul said, making reference with Alex Jones to upstarts like Andrew Jackson, "The Kingfish" Huey Long, Bobby Kennedy, George Washington and even George Wallace.

Estulin pointed out that his past predictions about global events were very accurate because of the solid information provided to him from within Bilderberg and the elite. Over 18 months ago Estulin correctly made the call that the Iran war had been delayed and was probably off the table, which is looking to be exactly the case after the release of the recent National Intelligence Estimate. Estulin in featured at length in Alex Jones' film Endgame, in which he is also filmed making the prediction based on his sources.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------PRISON PLANET.TV CHRISTMAS SPECIAL - IT'S BACK!Subscribe today for just $39.95 and get the equivalent of 5 months free!----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Estulin said his sources were from within the intelligence community and they were telling him that "the people of the highest levels of government - not related in any way at least visually to George W. Bush - the first initial conversation of what might happen if we were to do this," has taken place.

"The Ron Paul phenomenon has galvanized an entire nation," said Estulin, adding that both the people who discovered the plot and its potential protagonists are terrified at the consequences of what such an action will be because of the difficulty in judging just how severely the general public will react.

Estulin said that the conspirators, which he described as a "small circle of intimates," were discussing what the effect would be if Congressman Paul was "removed" - they are being very careful to use the word "remove" rather than more volatile terms, but Estulin was told directly that "remove" was a euphemism for assassinate.

Estulin said he may be able to be more specific on exactly who is discussing such an action in future, but warned that Ron Paul's staff should be aware of the issue.»

* Ambassador John Bolton: Surrender is Not an Option! blows the lid off of the recent US "intelligence" click to listen(Now) * Steel on Steel with John Loeffler The Treaty of Lisbon and the SPP Harold Hoffman of Britannia Radio (www.britanniaradio.co.uk)l(Now) * News Review by Harold Hoffman to include the DEMISE OF THE UK-EU CON ......STIPATION and THE CURRENT WORLD FINANCIAL STATE(Now)

Add to iCalendarmoreWe always need help by way of contributions & donations in order to grow the website and radio station. Please help us with your donations.

Additional Options

The contents of this site are not necessarily the views of the station. All articles are sourced and accreditation given.Where articles of the station are issued they are all copyright and must not be produced without the owners permission

~~~~~~~~~~Note:GyG's G&A Sites & Forums is an informational site and not for profit. Copyrighted material provided soley for education, study, research, and discussion, etc. Full credit to source shown when available.~~~~~

Sunday, December 02, 2007

I try to remember to post some of my older webpages–especially those with the best stories–to my current posts to my Blogs.There are hundreds, maybe thousands, of my old webpages out there online, and the search engines/directories feed information on them to folks conducting searches, mostly depending upon the keywords the searcher submits. There’s a lot of hit and miss involved here.

I have articles that continue to get hits almost daily, e.g., there’s a story by a Marine retired Major on his WW II Marine buddy, Sgt George C. “Patton” Scott; some of the lesser-known stories on “Chesty” Puller; Evans F. Carlson (Carlson’s Raiders); etc. And many stories of Marines, and others, whose names you wouldn’t recognize.

Right now I am posting a story I received from Marine Bill Monks in 1999. Bill joined the Corps in the latter years of WW II. He details events leading up to and including his arrival at Marine Corps boot camp and beyond, other training up to Guam, Iwo Jima, Chichi Jima, etc.; the barely known cannibalism incidents by the enemy, etc., etc.

If you like good, factual stories, history, and learning more about old time Marines, this one is for you. Try it, you’ll like it!

~~~~~~~~~~Note:GyG's G&A Sites & Forums is an informational site and not for profit. Copyrighted material provided soley for education, study, research, and discussion, etc. Full credit to source shown when available.~~~~~

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

9/11. Ron Paul, and H.R. 3076, the September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001...

The following is excerpted from 9/11, SIX YEARS LATERBy Pastor Chuck Baldwin

http://tinyurl.com/2xn56qhttp://tinyurl.com/2xn56q

" Instead of invading a country with no ties to 9/11, we should have followed Ron Paul's advice. Congress should have passed H.R. 3076, the September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001, and sent our forces on a specific and narrow mission to take out bin Laden and al-Qaeda.

According to Paul, "A letter of marque and reprisal is a constitutional tool specifically designed to give the president the authority to respond with appropriate force to those non-state actors who wage war against the United States while limiting his authority to only those responsible for the atrocities of that day. Such a limited authorization is consistent with the doctrine of just war and the practical aim of keeping Americans safe while minimizing the costs in blood and treasure of waging such an operation." This is precisely what President Thomas Jefferson did when America's ships were confronted with Barbary pirates on the high seas.

A few days following the attacks on 9/11, and drawing from our own history and Constitution, Congressman Paul proposed the following to his fellow members of Congress:

"If we can't or won't define the enemy, the cost to fight such a war will be endless. How many American troops are we prepared to lose? How much money are we prepared to spend? How many innocent civilians, in our nation and others, are we willing to see killed? How many American civilians will we jeopardize? How much of our civil liberties are we prepared to give up? How much prosperity will we sacrifice?

"The founders and authors of our Constitution provided an answer for the difficult tasks that we now face. When a precise declaration of war was impossible due to the vagueness of our enemy, the Congress was expected to take it upon themselves to direct the reprisal against an enemy not recognized as a government. In the early days the concern was piracy on the high seas. Piracy was one of only three federal crimes named in the original Constitution.

"Today, we have a new type of deadly piracy, in the high sky over our country. The solution the founders came up with under these circumstances was for Congress to grant letters of marque and reprisal. This puts the responsibility in the hands of Congress to direct the President to perform a task with permission to use and reward private sources to carry out the task, such as the elimination of Osama bin Laden and his key supporters. This allows narrow targeting of the enemy. This effort would not preclude the president's other efforts to resolve the crisis, but if successful would preclude a foolish invasion of a remote country with a forbidding terrain like Afghanistan- a country that no foreign power has ever conquered throughout all of history.

"Lives could be saved, billions of dollars could be saved, and escalation due to needless and senseless killing could be prevented."

Had we followed Dr. Paul's counsel, Osama bin Laden and most of his al-Qaeda terrorists would no doubt be dead, our troops would not be bogged down in another no-win war in Iraq, and America would not be hated and despised by almost everyone in the world as it is today."

~~~~~~~~~~Note:GyG's G&A Sites & Forums is an informational site and not for profit. Copyrighted material provided soley for education, study, research, and discussion, etc. Full credit to source shown when available.~~~~~

Thursday, September 06, 2007

Since 1776 and The Declaration of Independence, we have gone from being subjects of the King to, appearances aside, actually electing our own kings and willingly serving them well. And not only serving the king, but also the sub-kings in congress and at every level of the ever-growing federal government, and right on down to the lowest local level of government.

This is self-imposed tyranny, we have surrendered ourindividual sovereignty to a fictional entity--The State--that permeates every aspect of our daily lives and affairs, and it's getting worse all the time.

Is it too late to come to our senses--should we really choose to do so--and again break the bonds of oppression? How much further can they go? Can we still Take Back America?No man knows.

Has the time yet come when we, as did those first real Americans in 1776, have it up to here, declaring, again, our independence?Can we do it in 2008?

Many say yes to the above question, albeit desperate and confused as to how, specifically, to do so. At the same time many more are quite content with a new king every 4-8 years. In fact, they will fight you at every turn at any hint or suggestion that might deprive them of the status quo.

Even if sufficient numbers of us are finally waking up to reality and wish to free ourselves from our self-imposed chains--who will serve as our leader? Who among the legions of potential kings can we turn to, really?Short answer: None of them!

No, none of them are capable and worthy to lead us. Nor is there any "lesser of evils"--this we should all well know by now.

But there is one among us unlike the others, one who marches to a different drummer, separate, one who knows and thinks for himself. And that one man can be our pivot point.

Again, One, just the one--Congressman, Dr. Ron Paul of Texas.We can make a change in Election 2008, if we so choose.

Don't take my word for this, nor the word of any other. Find out for yourself, think, and decide.

~~~~~~~~~~Note:GyG's G&A Sites & Forums is an informational site and not for profit. Copyrighted material provided soley for education, study, research, and discussion, etc. Full credit to source shown when available.~~~~~

Sunday, August 12, 2007

"Stripping away the branch insignia makes soldiers more like Marines."~~~~~

The Army is rooting out its branchesBy Harry LevinsPOST-DISPATCH SENIOR WRITERSaturday, Aug. 11 2007

Now that we're at war, you see something you rarely saw in peacetime â€" soldierswearing field uniforms in airports and hotels.

And if you look closely at Army officers, you may notice that the new uniformslack something found on older uniforms â€" branch insignia.

Time was when an officer wore his rank on his right collar. On the left collar,he wore his branch insignia â€" crossed rifles for infantry, for example, or acastle for engineers.

Now, the collar is bare. The rank has been moved to a tab dangling down theshirt's front. The branch insignia is nowhere to be seen.

The result: It's impossible to "read" an officer's field uniform.

I called the Department of the Army to ask why. Nobody had an answer, althoughthey agreed (off the record) with my own theory:

Stripping away the branch insignia makes soldiers more like Marines.

Back when Army officers still displayed their branches, I asked a Marinecolonel why his service made it so hard to "read" a uniform. Aviators excepted,Marines show no clues to their military specialities. Why?

"Because we're all plain-and-simple Marines," the colonel said.

He explained, "If you ask a soldier what he does, he'll say, 'I'm infantry,' or'I'm airborne,' or 'I'm a tanker.' If you ask a Marine what he does, he'll say,'I'm a Marine.'"

I suspect that the Army's decision to strip away the branch insignia is a wayof prodding officers to see one another as soldiers first and specialistssecond.

Back in my soldiering days as a lieutenant in Germany in 1964-65, I proudlypinned the crossed rifles of the infantry on my left collar tab and donned ascarf that was colored the powder blue of the infantry.

Mind you, few of us going through the Infantry School at Fort Benning, Ga., hadwanted to be in the infantry.

But even though few wanted the infantry, everybody respected the infantry. Forthe first time in my life, I was macho. I could look down my nose at captainsand majors wearing the insignia of, say, the Finance Corps, or theQuartermaster Corps.

I'm guessing that the new uniform is an effort to dampen branch rivalries andget soldiers to thinking of themselves as soldiers.

Oh â€" those colored scarves are long gone. Too bad. On the day I learned thatI'd drawn the infantry, I said, "Infantry? Aw, (bleep)!"

I was unaware that standing behind me was a major of artillery from the ROTCfaculty.

He leaned over my shoulder and said with a malicious grin:"Look at it this way, Levins â€" the scarf will go good with your eyes."

~~~~~~~~~~Note:GyG's G&A Sites & Forums is an informational site and not for profit. Copyrighted material provided soley for education, study, research, and discussion, etc. Full credit to source shown when available.~~~~~

WASHINGTON — The commander of the Marine Corps, whose men and women man the front lines in Iraq and Afghanistan, said he fears there is no way to reverse the growing American dissatisfaction with the war in Iraq.

Without a turnaround in public opinion, he said, growing disaffection with thewar is likely to result in the same kind of withdrawal that America saw at theend of the Vietnam War.

"That's precisely what I can see happening today," said Gen. James T. Conway, "and that troubles me greatly as a military man, because I see victory being handed over to the bad guys, because our public is misinformed to a degree, is not engaged to a degree."

In an interview, Conway, a St. Louis native who late last year became the 34thcommandant of the nation's nearly 175,000 Marines, said he believes that fornow the United States needs to stay in Iraq, where he sees fighting insurgentsthere as crucial to protecting the nation's interest.

"We are making progress, incremental progress," said Conway, a graduate of Roosevelt High School and Southeast Missouri State University in CapeGirardeau. "I truly believe that we are fighting terrorists in Iraq. Al-Qaidais in Iraq.

"And yet there are those in our country who say, let's pack up and go home,that it's a civil war. I do not believe it's a civil war. This sectarianviolence is inspired for the most part by these terrorists. It's a tactic thatthey use to make it appear as though there is utter chaos.

"If we fold the tent and start to come out before we can claim a level ofsuccess, the bad guy wins. He's got momentum, he's got recruitment strength,he's got contributions, he's got self-respect."

But polls increasingly show that Americans want out of Iraq. Surveys show they have less faith in President George W. Bush's ability to handle the war or in the basic assumptions around the invasion and reasons for staying there.

Consequently, the prospect of withdrawal sits hard on the horizon, Conway said.

"I've got to be realistic," said Conway. "It concerns me."

Conway said he hoped that at the least, Americans will support a limitedcontinued involvement in Iraq, such as reducing the American presence to some 40,000 troops, with Americans training Iraqis only while patrolling forinsurgents in the Marine Corps' new, safer Mine Resistant Ambush Protectedvehicles.

"Will Americans support that, I don't know," Conway said. "I would hope so.That, to me, would be some level of middle ground. I'd rather see somethinglike that than just getting out."

Marines under strain

Many critics have claimed that the war in Iraq, aside from being ineffective,is making the United States less safe because it is unnecessarily damaging the abilities of the military.

The war is putting "significant stress" on the Marine Corps in a number ofways, Conway said. The repeat deployments and the short periods of time between them are increasing mental stress, such as post-traumatic stress syndrome, on the Marines, as well as financial and emotional burdens on their families.

"We've got a lot of young Marines who have deployed two or three times," hesaid. "The Marine may say, 'This is what I joined to do,' and the wife may say,'Well, go do it by yourself.' In that case, we lose good, quality people.We've got that problem, and the Army's got it."

Additionally, because the Marine Corps is so focused on counterinsurgency,Conway is concerned that it isn't training for other kinds of warfare. He notesthat the Marine Corps' war fighting capability is dramatically reduced fromwhat it was before the war started.

"We used to do 10 combined armed training exercises a year, big trainingoperations," he said. "Now we don't do any. That was our bread and butter. Now,we're focused on one segment of our capabilities. The other things have fallen by the wayside."

Conway is also concerned about recent accusations of Marine atrocities against civilians and combatants in Iraq and Afghanistan. Marines are accused of killing unarmed civilians as well as prisoners.

The Naval Criminal Investigation Service is looking into a report by formerMarine Cpl. Ryan Weemer, 24, of Hindsboro, Ill., that he and other Marinesexecuted unarmed prisoners.

Conway said he was concerned that the Marine Corps' ethos was being lost. He has ordered increased focus and training on ethics and battlefield conduct.

"I don't begin to believe that every Marine is guilty of everything that he'sbeen accused of," Conway said. "But the fact is that our country holds theMarine Corps up on a pedestal. They don't expect (these kind of incidents) ofus.

"We chip at that base, we chip at that marble every time one of these thingscome up. Our countrymen expect more of us. They don't expect us to go and shoot up a bunch of civilians if we get shot at … or slip off in the night and gomurder some guy because we're upset that he gets out of prison."

~~~~~~~~~~Note:GyG's G&A Sites & Forums is an informational site and not for profit. Copyrighted material provided soley for education, study, research, and discussion, etc. Full credit to source shown when available.~~~~~

Mr. President, 66 percent of today's public views your performance as "poor." You are today almost as unpopular as Richard Nixon was just before he resigned in disgrace. And most voters rank your presidency as a "failure" or as one of the "worst" — right down there with Jimmy Carter.

However, there is a way for you to reverse your fortunes in one fell swoop.

There is a way for you to do something so spectacular as to change the whole dynamic of American politics.

There is a way for you to earn the respect of those who today shun you.

There is a way for you to reverse the declining morale of our armed forces — and to restore pride again in the American uniform.

There is a way to take the national focus off of Iraq, and instead focus it on something for which you share no blame.

There is a way to make Americans feel good again about the country, because this single act will help to cleanse the body politic.

There is a way to expose all your predecessors, and rivals, for their role in something that the American people would never accept — if and when they know about it. And, Mr. President, there is also a way to "one-up" your father.

What is this magic elixir for a lame-duck-bordering-on-a-dead-duck presidency?

Quite simple, Mr. President.

This coming Friday — June 22 — you are meeting with Vietnamese President Nguyen Minh Triet in the Oval Office. It is the first time a Vietnamese head of state has come to the United States since before the war.

Here is a simple plan, President Bush: when you sit down with President Triet, tell him you recently received and read a copy of "An Enormous Crime: The Definitive Account of American POWs Abandoned in Southeast Asia."

Tell President Triet, "Mr. President, this never-ending POW issue has hurt, and continues to hurt, both our nations — and yet neither of us had anything to do with it. So here is what I am proposing."

As you speak, pull out a letter to President Triet and hand it to him. Then say, "President Triet, this letter from me to you serves as a public, presidential statement that the government of the United States is now prepared to pay the government of Vietnam $15 billion for all the living Americans who are "left over" from the war — including any in Laos. These include U.S. servicemen who were not "registered with the Centre for POWs. This $10 billion is to make up for the $4.75 billion Nixon and Kissinger pledged to you 35 years ago and which was never paid."

You can also tell President Triet that for face-saving purposes if Vietnam wants to continue to claim they have no POWs that is just fine with us. We understand. It is OK with us if they "find" the POWs in Laos and "liberate" them and return them to us.

We have no interest in embarrassing Hanoi; nor do we want to renew hostilities with them.

All we want is our men — all of them — and to put this sordid chapter in our national rear view mirror.

Yes, there will be critics who say, "we can't pay for these POWs. That would be tribute or ransom. It will encourage others to seize Americans and hold them for negotiation. And besides we don't have enough money any more for all of this."

Well, that is all nonsense.

We are now offering rewards in Iraq for the two missing U.S. Army servicemen. And President Bush, you have just pledged $30 billion for AIDS in Africa.

If we have enough for people in other countries, then we certainly have enough to pay for hundreds of our servicemen who have spent over 35 years in captivity waiting for Uncle Sam to come and bring them home.

So, Mr. President, are you going to step up to the plate and make history?

Are you going to be different than all your predecessors, including your father, who have allowed this festering sore to continue?

This Friday, President Bush, is the day you can reverse all the negative trends and do something so spectacular that you will earn a level of respect you haven't seen since right after 9/11.

~~~~~~~~~~Note:GyG's G&A Sites & Forums is an informational site and not for profit. Copyrighted material provided soley for education, study, research, and discussion, etc. Full credit to source shown when available.~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~Note:GyG's G&A Sites & Forums is an informational site and not for profit. Copyrighted material provided soley for education, study, research, and discussion, etc. Full credit to source shown when available.~~~~~

i just read your part 1 piece on the pow issue, and i must tell you it is magnificent - the most well-written, perceptive and on-target analysis of this national tragedy that has ever been written. EVER.

our paths must cross, and must cross soon, sir, so i can thank you in person - and maybe while doing so soak up a little of this very special guy alan stang clearly is.

with respect and thanks,

billy hendon

Download the original attachment

Americans Abandoned

Worst Treason in US History (I)

I had thought that by now � after all these years � it would be over, that, although the pain would never leave, it would persist as nothing more than a dull ache. I was wrong, of course. The book that inspires these comments brought it all back as bad as before, worse, because the book contains much I hadn't known. I could only read a few pages at a time. Then I had to wait until the rage and guilt subsided, guilt because despite my puny efforts, the best that I could do, the subjects of the book are still abandoned; rage because of the reason that is true.

This is a book about treason, not a single act of treason, but treason that continues for many years, for decades, treason perpetrated by the highest officials in our government through Republican and Democrat administrations, breathtaking treason on every page, treason that makes Benedict Arnold look like George Washington; that makes Aldrich Ames look like Audie Murphy.

The book is An Enormous Crime: The Definitive Account of American POWS Abandoned in Southeast Asia (New York, Thomas Dunne Books [St. Martin's], 2007), by former North Carolina Congressman Bill Hendon and Florida lawyer Elizabeth Stewart, whose father is missing in action in North Vietnam.

Yes, it is an enormous crime, so enormous that all the words I know seem insufficient. They don't adequately describe what happened; they don't cover the subject. "Enormous" itself doesn't do the job. The treason I'm talking about is more than mere treason, however long and extensive. It doesn't just betray the country. It is treason that violates the sacred relationship between men in combat, between you and me and the men we send to fight.

"Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends." John 15:13. But here you will read about men who lay down their friends' lives for love of career and self-protection, men who would deliberately betray Jesus, boast about it and � even worse than Judas � lack the decency to commit suicide. Here is what you will find in An Enormous Crime:

It establishes beyond even a hint of doubt that the Vietnamese Communists kept hundreds of our POWS after the war and that the traitors who ran our government at the time conspired with the Communists to abandon them. The book establishes those facts with a tsunami of evidence of all kinds, literally thousands of reports over many years � totaling 66,000 pages published here for the first time � from eye witnesses, from signal intelligence, from satellite imagery, to such an extent that no one without some other agenda could conclude otherwise.

Many of the reports corroborate each other. The signals could have been made only by downed Americans who know the secret codes. The satellites are of course American and can read the label on your lingerie. They can tell the exact coordinates of the sites. There can be absolutely no doubt that hundreds of Americans were there long after the U.S. government cut and ran in 1973.

Bill Hendon and Elizabeth Stewart pored over these thousands of official documents for twenty five years. The record shows that every Administration starting with Nixon's colluded in the treason. Nixon of course was a Socialist. He said as much when he announced he was a Keynesian, a disciple of Communist favorite and sexual predator John Maynard Keynes.

The treason consisted and still consists of destroying the evidence, of lying about it, of discrediting the witnesses, of doing everything possible to bury the Prisoners Of War alive, of sabotaging every effort to liberate them. Remember, these are men with names we knew were there. Yes, there were periodic investigations; but the purpose of a federal investigation, especially here, is to conceal the subject it is investigating.

All the traitors are here, starting with Nixon and Kissinger. Frank A. Capell, the late intelligence officer, exposed Heinz Kissinger as a member of Odra, a Soviet spy ring in Germany after World War II, code named "Bor." His guttural stench is worse than a week old corpse. Herr Kissinger has committed so much treason over so many years, has betrayed and killed so many that, honestly, I wonder why someone, God forbid, hasn't blown his God damned head off.

What did Heinz do here? He shared the Nobel Peace Prize with Communist Le Duc Tho by accepting the North Vietnamese demands in toto without negotiation, keeping the agreement secret from our loyal ally, the Republic of Vietnam in Saigon, one of the main participants. He said he would go to Hanoi "to pay our respects to the heroic people of North Vietnam," and later reflected that his acceptance of the agreement was "my most thrilling moment in public service."

South Vietnamese President Nguyen Van Thieu later said Kissinger "gave me the impression that he was a representative of Hanoi, not America." Yes, that is what he was. In a Nixon letter to the Reds kept secret from Congress for years, Heinz promised Hanoi $4.75 billion in reparations. When Congress balked, Heinz wrote the POWS off. Knowing that the Reds had kept hundreds, Nixon lied and announced that they all had come home.

The treason has continued through every administration and continues today. Jimmy Carter did everything he could to declare the POWS dead � and did so while CIA was sending the White House messages that quoted top Hanoi officials who were saying they did indeed hold American POWS.

Of course Jimmy Carter's treason rivals Kissinger's. It is difficult to find a betrayal of America in the past thirty years, and there have been so many � from the treasonous surrender of our Canal in Panama, to the betrayal of our loyal ally in the Republic of China, to the support of Fidel Castro � in which this dour, humorless skunk has not played a decisive role.

Throughout the administrations, Republican and Democrat, verified sightings of American POWS in Communist hands kept arriving in Washington. It is important to establish not only that the Republicans were as treasonous as the Democrats, but also that the Reagan Administration was as bad as the worst.

One of the reasons was that by the time Reagan took office, the Vietnamese "boat people" had set sail, fleeing the country however they could. Many of these people were friends, even allies, who had served beside us in uniform. They were comrades in arms. And they reported dozens of eyewitness sightings of American POWS in Communist hands to U.S. authorities.

You and I would have thought such sightings were opportunities. But the Reagan Administration treated them as crises the Administration had to overcome. For instance, in 1981, a CIA reconnaissance team crossed the Mekong into Laos, and traveled overland to "Fort Apache," where they observed a tall, dark-haired man who "could have been a Caucasian." CIA officials withheld that information from the Pentagon. William G. Graver, CIA, later testified that his bosses "did not want to put gasoline on the issue." What? Yes, that's what he said.

Again and again, the Reagan Administration denied POW files to Hendon and other sitting Congressmen, even including files Hendon had worked on himself as a civilian employee of the Pentagon. Hendon and the others consulted an attorney about filing suit against DOD. What legitimate reason could there have been to deny Hendon those files? Instead of looking for living men, the Administration focused on the pretext of looking for remains.

A couple of former Green Berets did go to court, accusing the Reagan Administration of burying or discrediting reports of living POWS. A week later, Lee Hamilton, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, issued a report that said in effect there were no living POWS. Recently, Hamilton was a member of the Nine Eleven Commission. He is a media-made "dignitary," who has made a career of burying inconvenient truths.

Major General Colin Powell became "livid" when Congressman Duncan Hunter asked him to help fly to Washington a Vietnamese who had seen live POWS in Hanoi twice. Powell angrily refused, snatching away a letter Hendon tried to hand to Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger. Of course, Colin Powell is no George Patton.

No matter how strong a sighting report was, no matter how credible the source, no matter how well corroborated, the government's POW "investigators" flunked it. Every one. No one was telling the truth. The sighting was a "fabrication," a "mistake," a "Russian," a "Swede"; co-author Hendon reports there was not even a category on the official form to report a verified sighting.

One of the most revealing aspects of this treasonous horror is that while Washington was doing everything it could to suppress the facts and discredit the witnesses, those witnesses again and again volunteered to return to the Vietnamese Communist hell to rescue the American comrades-in-arms they had served with and now had seen there. That's right; these Vietnamese volunteered to do the job Washington should have done. What could they hope to gain by taking such a risk, if no one was there?

One refugee said that he and some other resistance fighters had tried to rescue some Americans they had seen in a camp near Nha Trang in August, 1983, but that the Reds drove them off. A royal Lao sergeant saw twenty six American POWS at the mouth of a cave inside Laos. Back in Thailand, his commander ordered him to return to Laos to rescue the Americans, but, by the time they arrived, the Americans had been moved. Senate intelligence investigators compared his report to what they already knew and concluded he was completely credible.

A Vang Pao militiaman told U.S. authorities he had been imprisoned for nine years, until October, 1985 in a cave in Laos with five American POWS. The militiaman said he would happily go back to rescue them or to take pictures of them. Meanwhile, the Americans did nothing or worse. Of course there were heroes in the matter, like Lieut. General Gene Tighe, Colonel Mike Peck, who quit in disgust citing a "mindset to debunk," and Hendon himself, but they did not run the show.

Ross Perot offered to help. Remember that he had rescued his own men without government help from Teheran. For years, he had done what he could to help the POWS he knew had been left behind in the Nam. Here is An Enormous Crime's version of the meeting on the subject between Reagan and Perot:

"[T]he president, reading from three-by-five index cards he held in his lap and motioning � almost lecturing, really � with his left hand, conveyed to Perot the crystal-clear 'thanks but no thanks' message . . . ." According to one Administration official, the President was "deliberately cool."

What does this tell you? It tells me that Reagan knew perfectly well what was being done in his name. He was not an innocent bystander. Also, notice that he is reading from index cards, but he is holding them in his lap, presumably to pretend that he is not reading from index cards.

What kind of man � what kind of mind � must conduct such a crucial conversation from cards? By the way, I have had a few conversations with Ross "The Boss." I was able to get through them without index cards or lecturing and he understood instantly what I was saying. Of course, I wasn't the President.

In January, 1989, the Reagan Administration issued a final report which said there were no live POWS after 1973. In July, 1990, the Bush I Administration said the same thing. Meanwhile, reports of hundreds of living POWS were arriving, including one about a prison under the Ho Chi Minh Memorial in the center of Hanoi.

So foul did the betrayal become that Hendon and other congressional heroes and private citizens cobbled together a reward of $2.4 million of their own money, payable to anyone who escaped with an American POW and turned him over to U.S. authorities. But those treasonous authorities worked overtime telling people in Southeast Asia not to attempt rescue of those POWS and that there was no reward.

A Thai businessman came forward with information about Bill Milliner, a U.S. Army Warrant Officer missing for eighteen years. The businessman said Milliner was alive in Laos and could be brought to the Lao/Thai border for the reward. But the Joint Casualty Resolution Center (JCRC) told him to stop the rescue and there would be no reward. Hendon tried unsuccessfully to have the responsible officials tried.

An Enormous Crime also records in detail the staggering treason perpetrated by Senators Kerry and McCain. Under Kerry's direction, official POW records were destroyed, a felony. Kerry is not just a gigolo who specializes in marrying rich, obnoxious women. Because of his treasonous behavior and associations after he returned from his suspiciously brief tour in Vietnam, befouled with medals he had awarded himself, it would be no surprise to learn that he was a secret member of the Communist Party.

The aptly named McCain is of course an incredibly obnoxious, little puke himself, who goes out of his way to treat the POW families like garbage. For some reason, the encyclopedic Hendon/Stewart book omits the incident in which McCain actually embraced a North Vietnamese Communist torturer who had come to the District of Criminals to testify at one of McCain's phony hearings. Which again raises the perennial question: did the Communists recruit McCain when he was a POW in Hanoi? What really happened in Hanoi, John? Is McCain the McChurian Candidate?

Along these lines, for many years Ann Mills Griffiths has run the National League of Families. The League started out looking for live POWS. Then Miss Griffiths was put on a government panel and the families rejoiced. Now the League would have an official voice in government. Instead, she was co-opted � which was probably the reason they hired her � and began to spout the government line.

No more live POWS. Now she was looking for remains. In fact, no one has worked harder over the years to bury live POWS than Ann Mills Griffiths. If the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court were to testify that he had seen a live POW still in Communist hands, she would figure out a way to discredit him. But politics makes strange bedfellows, right? Over the years, an eminently reasonable question repeatedly asks itself. With whom is Ann Mills Griffiths in bed? Who is it, Ann? Give us a name and serial number.

End of Part IDownload the original attachment

Americans Abandoned

Worst Treason in U.S. History (II)

So where do we stand in the Bush Administration? If Japanese Imperial soldiers in their seventies could be discovered deep in some jungle decades after World War II, living in harsh conditions, awaiting orders from the Emperor for the final assault, equally hardy American POWS could certainly still be alive in Southeast Asia, still waiting for us to bring them home. Indeed, our encyclopedic authors make clear that today � today � today, while you read this, signals from captive Americans are still arriving.

Along these lines, in 1977, a former South Vietnamese navy officer undergoing Communist "reeducation" saw a couple of Americans under guard carrying wood. The Americans smiled and one of them made a V sign with his fingers, a gesture the South Vietnamese officer and other prisoners returned. So, at least in 1977, the American spirit still was alive in Vietnam. Is he still waiting for us to bring him home?

During the first Bush Administration, George H.W. appeared at a meeting of the POW families and rudely told them, "Shut up and I'll tell you what you want to hear." Offended, some of the special ops types present began to filter down the aisles toward the lectern. Thank God the women saw what was getting ready to happen; they surrounded the men, joined hands and herded them back up the aisles and out the doors. The men grumbled but did as they were told.

Had the women not acted so decisively, poor Jorge W. Boosh could have lost his daddy, the Secret Service detail could have gone to the hospital and a lot of good men could have wound up in jail. I wasn't there myself, but my dear friend Mrs. Earl "Patty" Hopper was and told me all about it.

Patty is the wife of Col. Earl Hopper, Sr., an early chairman of the National League of Families, whose son, Earl, Jr., is missing in Southeast Asia. Patty herself is chairman of Task Force Omega. I didn't come across this incident in An Enormous Crime, but you can read a dramatized version of it in my novel, Perestroika Sunset (go to alanstang.com). Bush, Sr., a strident advocate of world government � the abolition of our nation � was and is bitterly opposed to rescuing our abandoned men.

So here we are with son Jorge as President. What can we do? First consider who and what Jorge is. Along with fat slob, drunk, sexual predator Ted Kennedy, he is conducting the present invasion of our southern border, an essential step in his daddy's plan to submerge our country in a totalitarian socialist world government.

On March 23rd, 2005, he met with then Mexican President Vicente Fox and then Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin. They announced that henceforth the border would not be between the countries, but around the countries, abolishing them in effect. So the reason Boosh does not enforce the border is that he believes it no longer exists.

That is why Border Patrol agents and at least one deputy sheriff are on trial and in jail. Jorge's actions are calculated to reduce Border Patrol morale to zero. Would you aggressively enforce federal law on the border if you thought for doing so you could lose your job, your pension, your house and be thrown into jail? I would not.

Boosh started a war illegally, without the Declaration of War the Constitution requires; worse, as in Vietnam, his rules of engagement forbid our superb military to win. Even worse, far worse, he gives the often fatal edge in combat to the enemy. In combat in Iraq a man's best friend is not the man beside him but his lawyer. That is why we "cannot win." You cannot win a war by making nice.

Boosh routinely puts our best officers on trial. U.S. Marine Lt. Colonel Jeff Chessani � the best of the best � is just the latest example. Before him there were Lieut. Ilario Pantano and Col. Allen West. Other Marines are on trial; the only witnesses against them are Iraqis who may be terrorists. Boosh is trying to destroy the Marine Corps. We could win this phony "war" whenever Boosh lets us. Instead, we have Vietnam all over again. Remember that we won in Vietnam; we lost in Washington.

As I write, the latest example arrives. In a massive operation involving some two hundred agents, the federal government has arrested Vang Pao and many others in California. We have already mentioned Vang Pao. Who is he? He is a 77-year-old legend, the leader of some 100,000 Hmong now in this country. He is a former Royal Lao general, sponsored by CIA, who fought the Communists for years beside the United States in Laos. He is a comrade-in-arms. A school under construction in Wisconsin is being named for him. So why is Vang Pao under arrest?

He is under arrest for organizing an attempt to overthrow the typically bestial Communist government of Laos, which is presently perpetrating genocide against the Hmong people. The Communist dictatorship of Laos has fulsomely praised the arrests and suggests that Vang Pao and the others be tried under the Patriot Act. As always � as always � as always, the U.S. government is taking the Communist side, as it has since Washington helped install the Reds in Russia in the first place.

Why is Boosh doing all this? Because he is a Communist. He is a Communist world government traitor, like his father. That is why, against all reason, against the unusually united, overwhelming will of the American people � against political survival itself � he recently besieged the Senate to pass the illegal alien amnesty bill. He is just the latest President to abandon our men. So, realistically, with Boosh as President should we live with the pain and try to forget about these brothers-in-arms abandoned in Southeast Asia or can anything be done? Here is a realistic program:

1. First, no serious proposal should get anywhere near the government. The government is the enemy. It will betray you. It has always betrayed you. It always betrays our allies. Our authors have proved this better than anyone else. Avoid it. Tell the government nothing. Because the "mainstream media" are a branch of the government, tell the media nothing. Do not cooperate with the government. Whatever you wind up doing, tell only the people who "need to know," and take steps to thwart infiltrators.

2. Revive the reward our authors discuss in the book. It doesn't need to be $2.4 million. Even with today's devalued dollar, a reward of, say, $1 million would be enough. For this purpose, you could probably raise that amount in ten minutes. Plaster word of that reward up and down the Mekong. Because you now understand where the U.S. government stands, the flyers should warn that Washington will lie about the reward. To prove your bona fides, deposit the money in escrow in a prestigious bank, not an American bank � a foreign bank with no American branches. Co-author Beth is a lawyer; she knows how to do that.

3. "There is no military solution." The traitors have dinned that mantra into our minds so long and so incessantly that we almost believe it. No military solution? Really? Friends, there is no other solution. Remember, the war isn't over until the last man � Col. Pete Stewart � sets foot on hallowed American soil and bear hugs lady Beth. The war continues despite the treason. Without a military solution, no one will take you seriously. Boosh & Co. will dismiss you as jokes because the only thing a Communist respects is power. Accept the probability that if we are really serious about getting our men back, someone must die. Are we serious?

As we have seen, Laotians and Vietnamese have volunteered to go back and bring Americans out. South Korean Rangers would probably volunteer. So could Republic of China patriots. Recruit them. They have the advantage of being Asians, who would not stand out in Southeast Asia like blond telephone poles.

Back them up with the deadliest creatures who ever stalked the earth: the Marine Corps sniper, the gunny who can kill at more than a mile, the SEALS, Force Recon, Army Rangers and Green Beanies, leftover SOG types, etc., specialists in violent confrontation lusting to finish the job. Stop making nice. Don't repeat Vang Pao's mistake. Organize all this in another country. Take along some cameras and pretty wives. If anybody asks, laugh it up and say you are making a movie.

4. The make nice word these days is that we must negotiate. Negotiate with what? You don't need Donald Trump to tell you that, to negotiate, you must have something the other side wants. What do we have? We have nothing. The Communists still want the $4.75 billion promised by Nixon und Herr Heinz. Sure, let's negotiate. Let's make nice. But first let's get something to negotiate with, something they want. We can't get $4.75 billion. So what could we get?

I'm just fantasizing, of course, just day dreaming, but what would happen if somewhere in the world, without warning, the staff of a Vietnamese Communist embassy or consulate, including the ambassador, or, more easily, the high ranking members of a Vietnamese Communist delegation at an international conference on the redistribution of your wealth, or something, were suddenly kidnapped and secreted in well prepared bamboo cages, dressed in black rags and fed on slops.

Needless to say, I don't recommend this. H-e-c-k, no! I'm just naively wondering what would happen. Would something like that get Hanoi's attention? Would it give our side something to negotiate with? What would happen if these slimy Communist weasels were afraid to step outside, in fear that they could be cold-conked by a blond telephone pole? Admit it. However crazy you think I am, as you read this, you are smiling.

5. When we get one or more of these men back, hide them. Keep the rescue a secret. Don't even think of letting the DOD debunkers debrief them. Debrief them yourselves. Then, when all is ready, when they have sufficiently recuperated, surface them in a coordinated media blitzkrieg, if they are willing. Or, maybe they will never surface, understandably reluctant to face the predictable, treasonous outrage of the conspiracy for world government. The most important purpose of all this is not to prove some point, but to bring them home, to deliver Col. Pete to Beth.

Of course, these are just a few amateur suggestions. The military types could no doubt come up with many more and better. First, read An Enormous Crime. Let it sink into your pores. Go to the web site, enormouscrime.com, where you will see an overwhelming avalanche of evidence that buries any doubt. Below are a few excerpts. Shake off the decades of government brainwashing.

Then get mean.

________________________________________

Here are some sickening excerpts from what you will find on the book's web site, enormouscrime.com:

[Robert] Destatte, after digesting the latest news from Kuala Lumpur, composed a memorandum that included the facts of the Lieutenant's sighting and DIA's official interim assessment of the case. In the memorandum, Destatte acknowledged that the MOI Lieutenant was not seeking any money or favors in return for his testimony; acknowledged that the Lieutenant had now passed two polygraph examinations; and acknowledged that Xuan Loc K-4 was a "known camp" and that the Special Office possessed satellite imagery of the camp. Then, without offering any justification, Destatte declared that the Lieutenant was a "probable fabricator with no useful knowledge." 90

This refugee, a newly-arrived Vietnamese man named Dinh, had reported that following a series of interviews with analyst Sedgwick Tourison, Tourison had invited him to his (Tourison's) home in suburban Washington one evening, allegedly for a meal, but that when he had arrived, Tourison had accused him of being a North Vietnamese spy sent by Hanoi to spread disinformation about live POWs. According to Dinh, when he had vigorously denied Tourison's charge, Tourison had threatened to take him to the Pentagon that very evening and have him deported unless he signed a statement declaring that he had not actually seen the prisoners but had only heard about them from someone else. Appalled and frightened, Dinh had refused to sign and instead had bolted from Tourison's house and fled. 116 He had then contacted Madam Anh and, at her insistence, had taken his story to Burch, the Chairman of the Vietnam Veterans Coalition. When Burch and other Coalition officers had debriefed Dinh and found him credible, they in turn had taken him to the Hill where he had told his story to selected Members of Congress and their staffs.

Upon having heard Dinh's account, as noted in An Enormous Crime, Chapter 23, Rep. Douglas Applegate, (D-OH), a House Veterans Affairs Committee subcommittee chairman and a highly respected congressional champion of Vietnam veterans, had gone before the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee in early August to declare that he was "fearful" the Reagan Administration was covering up evidence of live American POWs. In his testimony, Applegate had said that, "[a]s of July 15, 1984, the Defense Intelligence Agency had over 2,620 reports of Americans in Southeast Asia � 640 of these reports are eyewitnesses," and, after making specific reference to Dinh's sighting, had declared that his (Applegate's) efforts to check out these reports had run into "roadblocks in the name of national security" and that he feared a cover-up may be underway. 117

Though Applegate's charge of cover-up had been greeted with skepticism by the Administration's many supporters on the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee - and had been denied outright later in the hearing by DIA Director Lt. Gen. James Williams, USA � the incendiary charge of "cover-up" had quickly become the battle cry for the activist families, Vietnam vets and others concerned about the fate of the living POWs. In mid-August, Burch and other Coalition leaders�all of whom were Republicans - had traveled to Dallas and, at a press conference held outside the site of the 1984 Republican National Convention, had charged that the Reagan Administration had "covered up the truth" about American servicemen still alive in captivity in Southeast Asia. To bolster their case, Burch and his men had released a number of declassified intelligence reports showing American POWs alive in captivity long after the war and had then brought Dinh to the podium to tell of the POWs he had seen and the mistreatment he had reportedly endured at the hands of Tourison. Following Dinh's remarks, Burch had declared that the rough treatment Dinh and other refugees had received was keeping many refugees from coming forward with information they possessed about living POWs, thus putting the lives of the POWs in jeopardy. Burch had then called on the Administration to form a joint task force with the Coalition to ensure that the abuse of the refugee sources would stop and that the intelligence would no longer be debunked without cause. 118

Knowing that hearsay accounts carried less weight than eyewitness accounts, the analysts would use this tactic time and again to debunk the eyewitness reports. The analysts' standard MO was to telephone the refugee and explain that DIA had determined that he or she was not telling the truth about seeing American POWs and that to avoid further embarrassment and make the whole thing go away he or she need only say that he or she had only heard about American prisoners and not actually seen them. If the refugee failed to get the hint or refused to comply, the analysts would continue to call and harass the refugee until he or she finally "recanted" his or her eyewitness account and "admitted" that he or she had not actually seen the Americans as earlier reported, but had only heard about them from another refugee, a relative, a friend, etc. (Statements made to Hendon during the 1980's by a number of refugees).

~~~~~~~~~~Note:GyG's G&A Sites & Forums is an informational site and not for profit. Copyrighted material provided soley for education, study, research, and discussion, etc. Full credit to source shown when available.~~~~~

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

There has been a rash of news articles lately where ex-Marines or Soldiers present at the scene during shootings, robberies, etc. have taken out the perpetrator. Usually the article, in the case of Marines, refers to the Marine as an "ex-Marine,"

Where does this term "ex-Marine come from? Well, I personally and clearly recall that it was in vogue just after WW II and long after. When someone was referred to as an ex-Marine, it was with pride and admiration of his having been a U.S. Marine! The old saying, "Once A Marine, Always A Marine" went hand-in-hand, and there was no contradiction in terms. Although the term has apparently gone out of use within the active duty establishment, it continues to be used today in the media, etc.

Nowadays, in cases where the Marine is a non-active duty Marine, and called an ex-Marine,. the hue and cry soon goes up by present day Marines that "there are no ex-Marines," and that the individual should be referred to, usually, as a "former" Marine. There are exceptions to this too, where the use of the word former is also found unacceptable by some present day Marines. And, the "Once A Marine..."saying itself is now even used as evidence that there are no ex-Marines.

And so, if correct, just where does authority/reason for not using the old term any longer come from? In any case, there is no directive that forbids the use of the term, just personal opinion alone being the foundation of this brouhaha. Monkey-see, monkey-do--somebody starts it, and the herd picks up the beat and marches on.

I am here to tell you that all this "no ex-Marines" nonsense is just plain bullshit!

During my own active duty as a Marine--1952-1972--I served with numerous pre--WW II, WW II, and Korean War Marines who routinely and proudly referred to discharged Marines, etc. as ex-Marines. The ex-Marine label, back in those days, bore no negative connotation. Why would it, both ex and former mean practically the same thing.

Myself, I regard The Old Corps as those years between the wars, as outlined in BGen Robert H. Williams's book, The Old Corps. I may not be Old Corps, but at least I rubbed elbows w/many of them when I was a PFC and I did duty w/many of them who were still then on active duty.

Not sure exactly when and where things changed regarding this terminology, my guess is sometime subsequent to the early 1970s. Now, however, things have gone even further in that boot Marines apparently now regard the term "ex-Marine" as a derogatory term they assign to Marines they judge as unworthy of the title Marine; Sgt Lee Oswald and Col John Murtha come immediately to mind as examples of this, according to many of the online messageboards, letters to editors, etc.. Both Marines (Oswald and Mutha), by the way, were/are honorably separated and convicted of no crime, so far as I know.

Just why Marines now believe they have the right to judge who is and is not worthy of the title Marine is unclear. The title itself is mentioned in The Marines' Hymn, and is "claimed" by each Marine-- there is no formal appointment/certificate awarded that can be revoked, as one might believe from listening to some of these Johnny-come-lately malcontents.

Another verse in The Marines' Hymn mentions Heavens scenes, where the streets are guraded by the United States Marines. Sure enough, many Marines now refer to departed Marines as having received their final orders to guard...The Gates of Heaven. Apparently, now, they have even transplaced Saint Peter of his post at The Gate!Unthinkable in The Old Corps!

~~~~~~~~~~Note:GyG's G&A Sites & Forums is an informational site and not for profit. Copyrighted material provided soley for education, study, research, and discussion, etc. Full credit to source shown when available.~~~~~

Thursday, July 05, 2007

"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear." --Marcus Tullius Cicero 42B.C.

The title of this column is a caption from a recent CNN poll news item which contained some extraordinary comments from poltroons like Jon Kyl of Arizona, a counterfeit U.S. Senator who sold out the people of Arizona and these united states of America with his solid support of lawlessness and the recently defeated amnesty bill. Kyl is quoted in the aforementioned: "It is a sad commentary in America today that many Americans have lost faith in their government," Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Arizona, said. He added, "Americans don't believe that their government is representing them, is acting on their behalf. The polls show it."

And, whose fault is that Kyl? This news item says it's come down to the people vs the government: "It was a bipartisan bill, supported by President Bush and by most Democrats in Congress. Why didn't it pass? Because the people didn't like it." That's right, the American people by a margin of some 68-72% were demanding its defeat. If ever there was a reason for one state to take up a challenge of the fraudulent ratification of the Seventeenth Amendment, it is Arizona. Unless and until the states finally decide they want back their rightful and equal power, the federal machine will continue stomping on them in pursuit of dissolving America and absorbing US into one region of world government with Mexico and Canada. Back in April 2004, Zell Miller [D-GA], a former counterfeit U.S. Senator recommended rescinding the Seventeenth Amendment. You can't rescind a law that does not exist and the Seventeenth Amendment absolutely, clearly and without question was never ratified by the states of the Union.

The warnings have been placed right in front of our faces regarding how the shadow government intends to deal with we the people taking back our government:

"1987: Then U.S. Attorney General William French Smith blew the whistle on a fairly low ranking Marine officer by the name of Oliver North. According to Smith, Lt. Col. Oliver North directly helped draft a plan in 1984 to impose martial law in the United States in the event of an emergency. This secret plan would suspend the U.S. Constitution and turn over control of the government to the little known agency at that time: FEMA. This plan would appoint military commanders to run state and local governments. Implementation of this plan would have been triggered by violent and wise spread internal dissent, disagreement with government policy or national opposition to any U.S. military invasion abroad. Essentially, it amounted to a complete and total suspension of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.

"Investigators who uncovered this plan believe that between 1983 - 1986, North's office was the 'central command center' for this informal secret structure which involved more than the illegal sale of arms to Iran and illegal funding of the underground war in Nicaragua under President Ronald Reagan. "Lifers" in the military were shocked, saying at the time that no Lt. Colonel is ever given the kind of power North was apparently given within this secret structure. So great was his authority, he could have the orbits of sophisticated satellites altered to follow Soviet ships around the world or launch high-flying spy aircraft on secret missions. Some even compared this whole operation as eerily similar to the one portrayed in the movie, Clear and Present Danger, starring Harrison Ford (1994).

"North wasn't alone in this secret structure. Others included Reagan's closest advisers: U.S. Attorney General Edwin Meese, CIA Director William Casey and National Security Adviser William Clark. Congressional investigators at the time were shocked by how far along this secret structure and planning had progressed. Arthur Liman, who was the chief counsel of the Senate's Iran-Contra committee stated in a memo that Oliver North was at the center of what he called a "secret government within a government." Prior to those hearings, Liman wrote that a policy decision made at the highest levels during the Iran Contra scandal "...reveals the whole secret government within a government, operated from the Executive Office Building by a lieutenant colonel with its own army, air force, diplomatic agents, intelligence operatives and appropriations capacity."

And: "The next real war we fight is likely to be on American soil. Our civilian-military face-off"

"One startling quote in this article is from Admiral Stanley Arthur, Commander of U.S. naval forces during the Gulf War, where he says, "Today the armed forces are no longer representative of the people they serve. More and more, enlisted as well as officers are beginning to feel they are special, better than the society they serve."

"When you turn to page two of this story, the headlines read, "Bill of Rights no obstacle for the Corps." Another disturbing quote jumps out at you, "Because of the rising potential for civil disobedience within the inner cities it is 'inevitable' the U.S. military will be employed more often within American borders." Timothy Reeves, The U.S. Marine Corps and Domestic Peacekeeping, a paper written at the Marine Command and Staff Colleges. Why the concern that there is a potential for civil disobedience by Americans? Where did this come from? I can make an educated guess based on my 14 years of research. In case no one has noticed, the bulk of our population is being forced into these big inner cities whose infrastructures are unable to sustain such masses.

"Further into this shocking story: "...Major Reeves notes, when faced with violating doctrine or violating the law, some Marines chose the latter course and detained suspects and conducted warrantless searches. Indeed, with characteristic Marine Corps bluntness, the major states that, "in interviews with Marine officers involved in domestic peacekeeping missions with officers responsible for articulating the Marine Corps' policy on domestic peacekeeping, it became apparent to the author that Marines took whatever action was necessary. At times, these actions required Marines to violate U.S. law.

"Similarly, Marine Capt. Guy Miner reported in the Gazette that Marine intelligence units were initially worried by the need to collect intelligence on U.S. citizens, which would violate a 1981 Executive Order, but that "this inhibition was quickly overcome...." And to chill you even further, "To enable the Marines to execute these new domestic missions in the same way that they do abroad, Major Reeves calls for major alternations in U.S. laws. "Experience from the Los Angeles riots," he warns, "demonstrated the need to grant U.S. Marine forces the legal right to detain vehicles and suspects, conduct arrests, searches and seizures in order to accomplish the peacekeeping mission." Now, do national IDs and driver's licenses take on a new meaning?" Click here to view the actual newspaper. Anyone paying attention to the paramilitarization of local police in this country and the destruction of Habeas Corpus can see this 1997 revelation wasn't just some exercise in word smiting.

Advertisement

From one of my columns, January 17, 2004 one can see the plan to ram world communism down our throats:

"Take a good look at this map published in the Denver Post, August 30, 1992, a mere four months before Bush, Sr. signed the unconstitutional NAFTA treaty into law December 17, 1992. This map is not some academic exercise. This IS what's on the horizon for US if the people of this nation don't mobilize. What you're seeing with this latest, grotesque proposal by Bush, Jr., has everything to do with building a new world order (global governance), redistributing the wealth of our nation into the hands of illegals and riffraff from all over the world." I published that information about this map in one of my old newsletters back in 1995 trying to warn Americans.

The people v the people

Not only do the American people see the complete and total failure of the Democrat controlled Congress and the real agenda of Bush and his minions, they are also coming to understand the big picture: world wide communist domination. Unfortunately, due to the corrosive, toxic messages out there brain washing Americans and the deliberate dumbing down of children in the government's indoctrination centers they call schools, we the people are also being pitting against one another in a massive ideological battle. Let me give you two examples, the first is a column by a Carolyn Baker, where she states:

"Franklin Roosevelt's stellar accomplishment in the engineering of New Deal policies was the emphasis on "purchasing power" for average Americans...The author goes on to point out the "feminization" of American society during the Great Depression, noting that "The self-centered, aggressive, competitive 'male' ethic of the 1920s was discredited. Men who lost their jobs became dependent in ways that women had been thought to be." Yet it was not only in loss of jobs that men became more "feminized."

"Whenever any individuals, male or female, join to create community in a spirit of cooperation, they are "feminizing", for the feminine principle is above all, relationalâ€”a concept inherent in the traditions of many indigenous peoples. It is this kind of joining that characterized the Great Depression era and to which we must aspire as we build economic, emotional, and spiritual lifeboats for the daunting journey ahead."

What drivel. This woman is promoting the communitarian doctrine - communism. Has she never read history? FDR's New Deal - a "stellar accomplishment" was focused around "purchasing power" for Americans? How about the opinion of people who were actually there at the time? "The New Deal will bring the Communist Party within striking distance of overthrow of the American form of government..." Arthur Henning, Chicago Tribune. "This may be the last presidential election America will have. The New Deal is to America what the early phase of Nazism was to Germany..." Mark Sullivan, Buffalo Evening News. The "feminine principle" is above all? God save us from these females. What she really needs to do is read Nancy Levant's superb columns on the rot of feminism. Better yet, Baker needs to read Nancy's book, The Cultural Devastation of American Women.

Example: A recent column by a woman named Caroline Arnold calling for Americans to: "...declare our independence from "the works of death, desolation, and tyranny," and from "the circumstances of cruelty and perfidy" that led to them."

And how does Ms. Arnold believe this should be done? By restoring democracy and getting rid of handguns. That's right, disarm the American people. That will surely bring us independence and freedom from tyranny! Apparently Ms. Arnold has never read a single word by Patrick Henry, has zero understanding of how gun control is nothing more than people control and she clearly ignores the fact that you cannot have freedom and liberty without an armed population. It's for certain that Ms. Arnold has ZERO understanding of the Second Amendment. She also doesn't even know our legal form of government; we are not a democracy. Each state of the Union is guaranteed a republican form of government, not a democracy. It is these types of dangerous ideas that are pitting Americans against each other: those of us who understand and stand for the Constitution and those who pump out nonsense and toxic waste. One can only hope that Americans who are genuinely concerned about the downfall of this republic don't fall for the propaganda above and seek the truth through historical documentation.

We the people had a huge victory last week in defeating the formidable forces arrayed against us for passage of the grotesque amnesty bill, but the evil doers will be back, make no mistake about it. We must continue to target Congress in between their vacations, demand enforcement of existing immigration laws and go after employers who hire illegals. Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano finally found her guts and signed the strongest legislation against employers hiring illegal aliens in the nation. About time, lady.

We must also demand passage of House Concurrent Resolution 40 (H.C.R. 40) to stop the North American Union. Demand Congress get rid of the so-called Patriot Act, the dangerous John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007, the Military Commissions Act of 2006, and National Security Presidential Directive No. 51. We must demand this police state being erected is torn down. As Dr. Edwin Vieira so articulately writes in his scholarly columns, we MUST get one state to reconstitute the militias under the authority of the state legislatures.

It goes without saying that Congress - unless Ron Paul gets elected - will never touch getting rid of the FED, the IRS and the withholding scam. However, the states themselves can and must adopt a sound money bill; see link below. We must continue to go for the jugular, expose the players and be relentless until we drive these America haters out of our political arena and control of our state and federal governments. We must continue demanding the state legislatures get rid of ALL electronic ballot machines and return to paper ballots, hand counted in the precincts in front of the general public or we will NEVER get rid of these traitors who have we the people by the throat - and that includes the mayors in this country selling US out.

Our fight is a noble one and if freedom and independence really mean anything, we the people must stay focused and strong. We the people are on the move and we must not falter. This is our government and we are the masters.

Sign Up For Free E-Mail AlertsE-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale

Devvy Kidd authored the booklets, Why A Bankrupt America and Blind Loyalty; 2 million copies sold. Devvy appears on radio shows all over the country, ran for Congress and is a highly sought after public speaker. Devvy belongs to no organization.

She left the Republican Party in 1996 and has been an independent voter ever since. Devvy isn't left, right or in the middle; she is a constitutionalist who believes in the supreme law of the land, not some political party. Her web site (www.devvy.com) contains a tremendous amount of information, solutions and a vast Reading Room.

Devvy's website: www.devvy.com

Before you send Devvy e-mail, please take the time to check the FAQ section on her web site. It is filled with answers to frequently asked questions and links to reliable research sources.E-mail is: devvyk@earthlink.net

~~~~~~~~~~Note:GyG's G&A Sites & Forums is an informational site and not for profit. Copyrighted material provided soley for education, study, research, and discussion, etc. Full credit to source shown when available.~~~~~